Mercy Housing Southeast
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 561993872
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3038303300
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,034,481
- Expenses
- $4,483,541
- Assets
- $34,112,548
- Liabilities
- $25,091,487
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JAMES ALEXANDER (PRESIDENT)
- BETH HAYNES (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KASSIDI BOENING (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT): $308,489 total reported compensation
- JAMES ALEXANDER (PRESIDENT): $262,394 total reported compensation
- JOE ROSENBLUM (SECRETARY): $242,964 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of mercy housing southeast is to directly facilitate the provision of affordable housing to families, seniors, people with special needs, homeless and potentially homeless individuals who would otherwise lack the financial resources to obtain quality, safe housing. Further, mercy housing southeast provides a variety of free programs and services to residents of their affordable housing projects which are designed to improve their lives and the communities in which they live.
What it reported doing in 2024
Resident services and programs are provided free of charge to residents of low-income multi-family rental properties including families, seniors, and people with special needs. The resident services and programs fall into four primary areas - education, community, health and wellness, and economic stability. Resident services and programs are tailored to meet the needs of each low-income housing community, including after-school programs for children, ged and english courses, employment initiatives and homeownership seminars.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 77
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 54.4%; rating input score 54
- Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.3%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.61; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 54.4% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 502 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.